"As an oral tradition" is the key-note I see in this.
And I could decide to disagree with it, if I were to make comparisons. I rather see Druidism having many branches, the Oral tradition as one.
I agree with Explorer, as I mentioned, to have a truly oral tradition would exclude the very print this discussion is about.. Though one could then argue what was printed came form something said. Though what was said makes sense to me, it isn't by that justification something I am endeared to or even
totally agree with.
I can agree.. that Druidism can't simply be whatever we discover using the basic ideals, and be totally void of what we consider the roots of the drui. I expect that the druids most likely never called their path druidism or druidry. No more that Christ called himself a Christian.
From my chair... I can say that our humanity today needs spiritual balance in natural intercourse. Humans all too often have made themselves as pseudo-gods and imposed all manner of wrong to their fellows in delusional grandeur. It is not much different today, and perhaps we all need to sense this.
http://www.npr.org/2012/01/15/144907141 ... -800-yearsSmall excuse to bastardize the most pure of druid ideals with things like the wheel of the year, and in light It could be reason to more authentically call OBOD "druidry" something else. Possibly Droooidry
In a lot of ways I have felt a lean more to the Earth-sea and sky, and further away from the wheel of the year druidism as of late. That is my own kind of personal drift as I wander my path. The trees speak in terms of diversity however, and so a tolerance during this time of rediscovery is a more beneficial thing, allowing for a transition which may well take a full generation.
I am glad for what Philip has done, though I initially learned from family of the "old ways" and they were never called "druidry". Learning of the tree spirits, lore and all came right from family, and none of it was ever written. So in my own small experience, the old ways were never dead or wiped out by any Romans. Much of what is discussed and the views on it in druidism is seen by me from my own eyes in a totally different light. Adding Wiccan colors to the Druid picture was and is a very new thing to me, and as I accepted it I have now clearly seen the difference and understand well why there is difficulty from many people and views.
What Droooidry could do might also be better learned without the psychology lesson IMO, however, again, so much damage has been done by so many delusions, it perhaps is a needed thing during this time of druid renaissance.
To the future however, much pondering should be done, as is being done and all the better for it.
So though we may disagree on some factors here, I see more we do agree in and on.
I have seen the difficulty in discussing these differences, often causing all manner of divide. I personally strive to understand and nurture the ways druidism could and can be as the future unfolds. Any kind of insight needs to be offered with respect to all things in a positive light with understanding. It will take hold in the ground if well watered and tended, and perhaps a more authentic and more clearly understood druidry will grow from it all.
In light
Merlyn
